It says in the article that this is proposed under the LFLAN thingie, which basically means the actual device won't be implemented for another 15-20 years. Then they go on to list some of the technical hurdles needed to complete this thing, one of which is is a sufficient energy source.
Getting a proof of security doesn't necessarily mean P=NP. In fact, RSA would have provable security if someone were to prove that factorization of composite numbers is an NP problem.
All of cryptology is built on a group of cryptographic primitives. Block ciphers, hash functions, factoring problems, discrete log problems, etc. are all used to build higher order cryptographic structures, such MACs, encryption, and signature schemes. However, all of these primitives are not proven secure. How do you feel about cryptology being built on such a fragile foundation, essentially making it a house of cards?
The parent is right. TCPA by itself is harmless. TCPA is simply specifications to develop hardware that handles data securely and executes software securely.
DRM is a whole other story and is often being confused with TCPA. DRM is bad stuff and WILL let big bad corporations like MS to control what you can do on your box.
Methanol is a low explosive, which means it just burns rather than explodes. In order for it to explode, it has to be in an enclosed space. In your fuel-cell battery, the concentration is too low to cause enough of an explosion to damage the airplane. I'd probably be more worried about the hair spray on the woman that is sitting in front of you.
The NSA, interestingly enough, measures their computing power in acres. Yes, not Megahertz or flops or anything lik e that. They measure their computing power in terms of how many acres of computers they have. I think the current value is several thousand acres of computing power.
I do system administration for a network with almost every Unix architecture out there. Hands down, the worst architecture I have to maintain is HP-U/X. Not very far behind that is Linux. It just doesn't work well as a networked OS.
I tend to see Mac OS X being more of a driver than Linux in the future. Mac OS X is a single OS, as opposed to a set of OSes that may or may not work together. Also, OS X also has the backing of a long established company that will probably be around in the foreseeable future. OS X is also a BSD, which is a much better OS than Linux. Lastly, Apple is adopting a less proprietary model and much of the operating system is open source, so many of the benefits of a completely open source OS are there too.
It has to do with the fact that this thing was hyped so much and a LOT of people were excited to see what it was. I know I was. I believed all the hype that it would change the way cities are designed and such. I figured DK had come up with the holy grail of technology. IT was the biggest thing in the news for qutie a while.
And then it comes out. It's a horrific looking scooter that has terrible range, horrible price tag, doesn't move fast enough, etc etc. I just looked at it and was like "Wha?" It wouldn't change anything. It probably wouldn't even sell well. It was disappointment of the most extreme variety. That is why I'm bitter. They got my hopes up and released a pathetic little scooter.
Unfortunately, you can't exploit international waters on a jet liner. The jet liner is considered to be part of the country that it took off from. So, if I took a plane from US to Japan, I would technically be on US soil until I stepped off the plane in Japan.
Think about it this way. In order to cover an entire airplane, you'll need one or two access points for 802.11b access. In order for ethernet to work, you'd have to put jacks on every seat, which may mean replacing the entire seat. So, the difference is a couple of hundred bucks for two APs, or replacing every seat in the plane with seats with ethernet jacks.
Somewhat off-topic, but I've always wondered why/. people are so enamoured with Opera? It is a proprietary browser that you have to pay for./.ers, on the whole, are opposed to proprietary stuff. So, why abandon that credo when it comes to a web browser?
While Opera does have its merits, I don't like the fact that I have to pay for it. Why pay for a browser when I can download several different ones for free? Also, a lot of pages I go to aren't rendered correctly in Opera. While it is most likely the fault of the page writer for writing bad HTML, I like the feature in IE that interprets the HTML of idiots into a good page.
Well, I do think Babylon 5 was the greatest sci-fi series of all time. But yeah, I've always been a big fan of any fiction that shows lots of grey in it. I don't think enemies should always be enemies and the good guys should always be good guys.
It's simple. We need a new perspective. The first five shows were from the perspective of the Federation, from a human perspective. Why not change the perspective to mix it up a bit?
How about Star Trek: Obsidian Order? A sci-fi Alias-like show that follows an agent or two from the Obsidian Order? Or how about a show from the Romulan's perspectives? I'm tired of watching a show about the high-minded Federation who is always perfect. I want to see shades of grey instead of black and white. I want to see some depth to the universe.
I doubt this will change the fact that the third Star Wars will probably suck.
I always wondered why Lucas didn't do this before. He had all these disparate companies that did different things. It seems like he could do things a lot more efficiently if they combined everything into one mega-studio.
I heard about TWINKLE in a class actually. Sounds kind of bizarre. I wonder if the NSA has a giant facility with a $10B version of this thing that factors all of our primes.
Anyways, RSA NEVER was secure. It was based on a problem which was *practically* hard. In practice, it seemed pretty hard, but there never was any mathematical proof that it was hard (i.e it is NOT NP-complete). Factoring large composites into their prime factors is hard at the moment, but it is very likely there will be a time when you can punch a function on your simple scientific calculator and easily factor billion digit composites. TWINKLE is just proof that there *ARE* fast ways to factor composites into their primes.
What is the solution? We should have never used it to begin with. Perhaps the NSA pushed it behind the scenes because they knew a way to factor large primes would eventually come. Maybe they already have a better method than TWINKLE. Regardless, NSA isn't secure. We should have used a system based on an actual NP-complete problem, such as the decoding problem. The McEliese cryptosystem seems to be secure and it is based on a NP-complete problem, so the only way to break it is to steal the other person's key or brute force it.
I know some P2P networks just match file size and name, but I'm pretty sure most of the good P2P networks check a file's MD5 to see if it is the same as another. If the MD5 matches, it's probably the same file, despite having a wildly different name.
Unless Overseer or whatever found a reverse algorithm for MD5, I doubt very much that they could degrade the qualify of a music file in such a way that the MD5 doesn't change.
Slashdot Mirror
Just line them up in a single line. There will be on line of 4 pennies, but 2 lines of 3 pennies. Ahah!
RTFA.
It says in the article that this is proposed under the LFLAN thingie, which basically means the actual device won't be implemented for another 15-20 years. Then they go on to list some of the technical hurdles needed to complete this thing, one of which is is a sufficient energy source.
Hey and what do you know! Both are in second place due to underhanded and sneaky maneuvering by their opponents.
People who typically do total immersion cooling use mineral oil. It is a non-organic oil, so it doesn't spoil. Doesn't conduct electricity either.
Mineral oil is very similar to transformer oil, which is what electricity companies use to keep the transformers cool.
Getting a proof of security doesn't necessarily mean P=NP. In fact, RSA would have provable security if someone were to prove that factorization of composite numbers is an NP problem.
All of cryptology is built on a group of cryptographic primitives. Block ciphers, hash functions, factoring problems, discrete log problems, etc. are all used to build higher order cryptographic structures, such MACs, encryption, and signature schemes. However, all of these primitives are not proven secure. How do you feel about cryptology being built on such a fragile foundation, essentially making it a house of cards?
The parent is right. TCPA by itself is harmless. TCPA is simply specifications to develop hardware that handles data securely and executes software securely.
DRM is a whole other story and is often being confused with TCPA. DRM is bad stuff and WILL let big bad corporations like MS to control what you can do on your box.
Come on. The one article where it would be *appropriate* to make an Underpants Gnomes joke and there is not one to be seen. I'm disappointed.
Methanol is a low explosive, which means it just burns rather than explodes. In order for it to explode, it has to be in an enclosed space. In your fuel-cell battery, the concentration is too low to cause enough of an explosion to damage the airplane. I'd probably be more worried about the hair spray on the woman that is sitting in front of you.
The NSA, interestingly enough, measures their computing power in acres. Yes, not Megahertz or flops or anything lik e that. They measure their computing power in terms of how many acres of computers they have. I think the current value is several thousand acres of computing power.
Is an OS that can actually function as a server.
I do system administration for a network with almost every Unix architecture out there. Hands down, the worst architecture I have to maintain is HP-U/X. Not very far behind that is Linux. It just doesn't work well as a networked OS.
I tend to see Mac OS X being more of a driver than Linux in the future. Mac OS X is a single OS, as opposed to a set of OSes that may or may not work together. Also, OS X also has the backing of a long established company that will probably be around in the foreseeable future. OS X is also a BSD, which is a much better OS than Linux. Lastly, Apple is adopting a less proprietary model and much of the operating system is open source, so many of the benefits of a completely open source OS are there too.
They need to combine two or more overused stories into a single one. My person suggestion is:
Apple is going out of business because of the end of Moore's Law.
It has to do with the fact that this thing was hyped so much and a LOT of people were excited to see what it was. I know I was. I believed all the hype that it would change the way cities are designed and such. I figured DK had come up with the holy grail of technology. IT was the biggest thing in the news for qutie a while.
And then it comes out. It's a horrific looking scooter that has terrible range, horrible price tag, doesn't move fast enough, etc etc. I just looked at it and was like "Wha?" It wouldn't change anything. It probably wouldn't even sell well. It was disappointment of the most extreme variety. That is why I'm bitter. They got my hopes up and released a pathetic little scooter.
Nerds of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your wedgies!
Unfortunately, you can't exploit international waters on a jet liner. The jet liner is considered to be part of the country that it took off from. So, if I took a plane from US to Japan, I would technically be on US soil until I stepped off the plane in Japan.
Google can use that one to get out of any lawsuit. "We aren't affiliated with the authors of www.google.com, nor responsible for its content."
Think about it this way. In order to cover an entire airplane, you'll need one or two access points for 802.11b access. In order for ethernet to work, you'd have to put jacks on every seat, which may mean replacing the entire seat. So, the difference is a couple of hundred bucks for two APs, or replacing every seat in the plane with seats with ethernet jacks.
Somewhat off-topic, but I've always wondered why /. people are so enamoured with Opera? It is a proprietary browser that you have to pay for. /.ers, on the whole, are opposed to proprietary stuff. So, why abandon that credo when it comes to a web browser?
While Opera does have its merits, I don't like the fact that I have to pay for it. Why pay for a browser when I can download several different ones for free? Also, a lot of pages I go to aren't rendered correctly in Opera. While it is most likely the fault of the page writer for writing bad HTML, I like the feature in IE that interprets the HTML of idiots into a good page.
Well, I do think Babylon 5 was the greatest sci-fi series of all time. But yeah, I've always been a big fan of any fiction that shows lots of grey in it. I don't think enemies should always be enemies and the good guys should always be good guys.
It's simple. We need a new perspective. The first five shows were from the perspective of the Federation, from a human perspective. Why not change the perspective to mix it up a bit?
How about Star Trek: Obsidian Order? A sci-fi Alias-like show that follows an agent or two from the Obsidian Order? Or how about a show from the Romulan's perspectives? I'm tired of watching a show about the high-minded Federation who is always perfect. I want to see shades of grey instead of black and white. I want to see some depth to the universe.
I doubt this will change the fact that the third Star Wars will probably suck.
I always wondered why Lucas didn't do this before. He had all these disparate companies that did different things. It seems like he could do things a lot more efficiently if they combined everything into one mega-studio.
I heard about TWINKLE in a class actually. Sounds kind of bizarre. I wonder if the NSA has a giant facility with a $10B version of this thing that factors all of our primes.
Anyways, RSA NEVER was secure. It was based on a problem which was *practically* hard. In practice, it seemed pretty hard, but there never was any mathematical proof that it was hard (i.e it is NOT NP-complete). Factoring large composites into their prime factors is hard at the moment, but it is very likely there will be a time when you can punch a function on your simple scientific calculator and easily factor billion digit composites. TWINKLE is just proof that there *ARE* fast ways to factor composites into their primes.
What is the solution? We should have never used it to begin with. Perhaps the NSA pushed it behind the scenes because they knew a way to factor large primes would eventually come. Maybe they already have a better method than TWINKLE. Regardless, NSA isn't secure. We should have used a system based on an actual NP-complete problem, such as the decoding problem. The McEliese cryptosystem seems to be secure and it is based on a NP-complete problem, so the only way to break it is to steal the other person's key or brute force it.
I know some P2P networks just match file size and name, but I'm pretty sure most of the good P2P networks check a file's MD5 to see if it is the same as another. If the MD5 matches, it's probably the same file, despite having a wildly different name.
Unless Overseer or whatever found a reverse algorithm for MD5, I doubt very much that they could degrade the qualify of a music file in such a way that the MD5 doesn't change.
...that you are supporting terrorists! When you use DRAM chips, you're computing with Bin Laden.